<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2018 (12) TMI 127 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371358</link>
    <description>A co-operative society&#039;s income from selling public distribution system goods through fair price shops qualified for deduction under Section 80P, because the activity was authorised by its by-laws and carried out pursuant to Government and Registrar directions. The Madras High Court treated the society&#039;s ancillary fair price shop operations as part of its authorised business under the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act framework, and found the Revenue&#039;s claim that sales were to non-members unsubstantiated. The Court distinguished the precedent relied on by the Revenue and held that the disputed income was attributable to the society&#039;s business, entitling the assessee to the statutory deduction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2019 12:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=545155" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 127 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371358</link>
      <description>A co-operative society&#039;s income from selling public distribution system goods through fair price shops qualified for deduction under Section 80P, because the activity was authorised by its by-laws and carried out pursuant to Government and Registrar directions. The Madras High Court treated the society&#039;s ancillary fair price shop operations as part of its authorised business under the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act framework, and found the Revenue&#039;s claim that sales were to non-members unsubstantiated. The Court distinguished the precedent relied on by the Revenue and held that the disputed income was attributable to the society&#039;s business, entitling the assessee to the statutory deduction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371358</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>